/ Sign-up
Your question

[help] choosing a CPU for my new gaming desktop

  • CPUs
  • Desktops
  • Intel
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
May 15, 2008 6:12:36 PM

So I'm planning to build my own desktop and first I'm choosing a processor, need some help with that
Now I have some questions about what processor to use, I want to play good games and surf a lot (grafics at high always, running multiple games without lag...)
and also downloading a lot...

I've chosen the E8400 but there are a lot similar ones with a slight price difference (not all 8400 but around it)
what's the difference between these?:
-Intel Core 2 duo E8400 Wolfdale
-Intel Xeon E3110 Wolfdale
-Intel Xeon 3085
-Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe
Or maybey??
-amd athlon 64 X 2 6000 + windsor
-amd athlon 64 X 2 6400 + windsor
and 1 important question
when I look at quad cores they say like: 2.6 GHz
and a dual: 3.0 GHz so the dual is better??
or is it 4x2.6 versus 2x3.0?? so quad is better??

So what should I choose at then end?? intel? AMD? something else?

Thank You Very Much!!!

More about : choosing cpu gaming desktop

May 15, 2008 6:23:17 PM

The 2.33 T7600 is a Mobile chip won't work on a standard 775 mobo. Mainly for the laptop market.

Atm the Q6600 Go revision and E8400 are prob the best bang for buck with a very good overclocking capability. I'd push more for the E8400 if your comps for just pure gaming. Both can squeeze another 1Ghz extra with sufficient cooling & coupled with a good mobo capable of at least 450 FSB for the E8400.

If your gaming and thinking of an AMD platform the 6400+ is fine. Black Edition is fairly pointless as it's almost at the maximum clock speed the Athlon 64 90nm can do. With only 200-300 Mhz extra to squeeze.
May 15, 2008 6:24:29 PM

Honestly I'd stick to the Intel C2d chips. No need for going to the extreme. As a gamer I'd save that money and make sure I'd have some really good ram and a very good video card. I used to be a big AMD fanboy but they are waaaaay behind intel now. Honestly I'd say for most C2D chips they'll be good gaming chips, even if you buy a budget E4300 (oldie but goodie).

If you could afford the quad core, I'd say get that for future uses, but make sure you get a good deal on it. The prices for a Q6600 are dropping and they're best bang for the buck, IMHO
Related resources
May 15, 2008 6:28:49 PM

<--- Gamer 24/7

to tell u the truth I got a dual core with a 512mb video card, and all my games like call of duty 4 with full setting turn all the way up on-line play smoothly with no lag. I can run two world of warcraft accounts at the same time with no lag. I can watch a video and play videos games at the same time with no lag (Dual screens). A dual core will do the job but more power dose not hurt all depends on your wallet. I would love to have a quad core but cant afford it but my dual core dose the job and im happy with it. :) 
May 15, 2008 6:35:55 PM

So I'm definelty going for a Good dual my budget is 1000-1500 euros = 2000-2500$ for the whole desktop so whats the best I can afford remembering to spend also a lot of my money on video card and mobo??
May 15, 2008 6:47:12 PM

you can choose either 8800GTS or 9800GTX... but IMO 8800GTS is a great VFM card out there
or you can be patient, since the GT200/RV770 are just around the corner and you wont lose much by waiting.
May 15, 2008 6:55:35 PM

both the E3110 and the E8400 are the same thing, except for the higher voltage range in E8400 which may be slightly better for OCing
May 15, 2008 6:56:14 PM

The Xeon E3110 is functionally equivalent to the E8400. The only difference is that since the E3110s are sold as "server" CPUs, they're supposedly made to a higher standard. But otherwise, they're the same.
May 15, 2008 6:56:30 PM

I just put in a bargain e7200 for $139. I love it. The e7200 and a 3870 run COD4 at 60-90FPS @ 1200x900, 4AA, 10AF, all on high. It runs Legions at 200FPS.

stay Dual core unless your video editing or rendering. just gaming stick with dual core. Next year the 45nm quads will be much cheaper.
a b à CPUs
May 15, 2008 7:18:27 PM

Exactly, games still don't use 2 cores that well, 4 is just wasting $$ right now for gaming.
May 15, 2008 7:23:42 PM

So dual I decided!!
Now 8400 or 8500 I'm deciding later
They are like the best dual cores u can get right??
Now what thing next I should choose? mobo? any suggestions?
May 15, 2008 7:26:48 PM

yea go with a Asus Dexlus mobo model. Good gaming board and over clock friendly. :) 
a b à CPUs
May 15, 2008 7:33:07 PM

May 15, 2008 7:37:14 PM

I don't know what overclock is but from what I've read it is improving ur CPU by giving it more electricity and so make it better then normal fabric configuration?
But it makes CPU have less lifetime doesnt it?
So asus is compatible with the Intel 2 core 8500 or 8400?
May 15, 2008 7:56:43 PM

I like the Gigabyte GA-EX38-DS4.
May 15, 2008 8:32:34 PM

I'm gona look around for a motherboard now just one confirmation needed:
Are 8500 and 8400 currently the best dual cores? (or almost)
May 15, 2008 8:33:48 PM

E8400 is better, because it's cheaper and clocks almost the same as the way more expensive E8500.
May 15, 2008 8:35:28 PM

Ok but like 8400 is like the best dual?
May 15, 2008 8:38:51 PM

If your not overclocking and just going by purely stock speeds the E8500 is the quickest dual core, but in most peoples eyes not worth the extra 0.5 multiplier when both the E8400 and E8500 overclock to around the same speeds!
May 15, 2008 8:45:44 PM

what u mean with the 0.5 multiplier?
probably I'll take the 8400 depending what money I'll have left at the end... :p 
May 15, 2008 8:50:02 PM

The reason why the E8500 is faster than the E8400 is the multiplier is at 9.5 so:

9.5 times the FSB of 333 = 3.16Ghz

While the E8400 has a multplier of 9 so:

9 times the FSB of 333 = 3.0Ghz
May 15, 2008 8:57:27 PM

The 8400 has the better value. 8500 is not worth the extra money.
May 15, 2008 10:01:03 PM

E8600 in Q3 is going to be sweet. (10x multi)
May 16, 2008 5:59:45 AM

guys is it safe to assume, that in the near(or far) future quads will give more bang for the buck;i mean once apps including games, begin to take advantage of those extra cores that we'll be seeing a very huge performance increase

lets say about 1 year from now, for future games, prolly an old q6600 will still outperform a new duey thats runs twice its clock. will it? maybe even an old xeon x3210 will do the job.

if only i can predict the future XD..
May 16, 2008 7:07:51 AM

i just dont get it, the xbox360 and ps3 both have more than 2 cores, and im pretty sure these developers are utilizing at least 3 cores on them. why does multicore game development on the pc hasnt kicked off yet?

64bit apps + quads = PWNAGE!

too bad it only happens on paper
May 16, 2008 3:05:40 PM

now I have to choose between some similar types of processors (look at start of the thread)
May 16, 2008 9:20:45 PM

wich one should I take?
May 17, 2008 7:14:43 AM

I'm close to taking the E8400
But I'm jsut curious why the other 5 are also 3.0Ghz and no much difference
What's the difference between them?